Three onchain apps returned a combined $96.3 million to their token holders over the last 30 days, according to data shared by Cointelegraph on May 10, 2026. The list groups Hyperliquid, EdgeX, and Pump.fun under a single revenue-sharing thesis: protocols that generate real fees and route them back to holders rather than reinvesting all of it into growth.
The figure lands in a market still digesting weeks of mixed flows. Bitcoin sits at $81,310 (up 0.6% on the day), Ether at $2,355, and the Fear and Greed index reads 51 (Neutral) as of May 10, 2026. In that flat tape, hard revenue numbers attached to specific tokens stand out more than another headline about ETF inflows or macro positioning.
The three names doing the work
Hyperliquid is the largest of the trio and the cleanest case study. The perp DEX runs an Assistance Fund that uses trading fees to buy HYPE on the open market, and that mechanism has been the main driver of token demand since launch. Buybacks on Hyperliquid scale directly with perp volume, which has remained one of the strongest sustained narratives in 2026.
EdgeX is the newer entrant. The exchange has expanded fast on perpetuals and points programs and now sits inside the same revenue-share narrative. Its token-economics design routes a share of platform fees back to holders, which is what places it in the $96.3 million combined figure.
Pump.fun has changed shape several times in the last year. The launchpad cycled through fee waivers, creator-fee experiments, and a series of buyback programs as memecoin launch volume cooled. The current model channels platform revenue into PUMP buybacks, which is why the protocol still appears on a list with two perp venues despite the very different business it actually runs.
Revenue-sharing has become the default pitch
A year ago, almost every protocol token shipped with a vague utility story: governance, future fee discounts, "alignment." That language has lost most of its weight. The token decks that move now lead with a buyback or a direct distribution mechanism, with the supporting math on the next slide.
The shift is partly a response to how poorly utility tokens performed through the 2024 to 2025 stretch. Holders learned that governance rights without cash flow were not a floor. Buybacks and distributions are at least a number that can be measured against market cap, even if the buyback price is set by a discretionary committee and the distribution rate can change.
It is also a regulatory adaptation. Direct profit-sharing in the legal sense is hard to defend in the United States. A buyback that uses platform fees to retire tokens on the open market is a softer claim and one that several teams have decided is the cleanest way to share economics with holders without pulling in securities risk.
Reading the number in context
The $96.3 million figure tells you that these three apps generated enough revenue last month to fund meaningful buybacks. It does not tell you how the buyback math compares to dilution from team and treasury unlocks, or what the implied yield is at the current token price. A protocol returning $30 million to holders against a $20 billion fully diluted valuation is a very different proposition from one returning the same amount against a $2 billion FDV.
It also does not address durability. Hyperliquid's buyback rate is tied to perp volume, which moves with crypto volatility. EdgeX is competing in a crowded perp space where market share rotates quickly. Pump.fun's revenue depends on memecoin trading appetite, which has been the most cyclical category in the last two years. Strong months can be followed by quiet ones.
The framing matters because revenue-share tokens are now sometimes pitched as bond-like income vehicles. They are not. The yield is undefined, the underlying revenue is volatile, and the buyback is at the discretion of the issuing entity. The closest fair comparison is an equity buyback at a high-growth, low-coverage company, with the added wrinkle that the underlying entity may not exist as a legal person.
A signal worth pricing in
For traders, the takeaway is that distribution data is becoming a real input alongside TVL, volume, and active users. Three apps generating $96 million in 30 days is a non-trivial cash flow profile, even spread across very different business models. Expect more dashboards and league tables tracking this metric over the next few quarters.
For holders, the question is which of the three has the most defensible revenue base. Hyperliquid has the longest track record and the deepest perp moat. EdgeX has growth but unproven retention. Pump.fun has the highest cyclicality of the three. The combined figure flatters all three, but the underlying quality is not the same.
Overview
Hyperliquid, EdgeX, and Pump.fun returned a combined $96.3 million to token holders over the last 30 days, per Cointelegraph data published May 10, 2026. Hyperliquid drives the figure through fee-funded HYPE buybacks, EdgeX through a newer perp-fee distribution, and Pump.fun through PUMP buybacks tied to launchpad revenue. The number underlines how revenue-share mechanics have moved from a side feature to the core token-design pitch in 2026, but it does not normalize for FDV, dilution, or the durability of each protocol's revenue source. Treat it as a useful aggregate, not a yield quote.
